First  Prev  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  Next  Last
Post Reply Is vengeance self defense?
36195 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
26 / M / Cloud 9.
Offline
Posted 9/10/15

Ryulightorb wrote:


spensaur wrote:


Ryulightorb wrote:


spensaur wrote:


FlyinDumpling wrote:


Nightblade370 wrote:


FlyinDumpling wrote:

It seems like people are defining revenge from how they are use to perceiving it. For this topic, revenge is strictly used in the way that's defined here. This does not include a plot to get back at someone after days it has happened, or anything premeditated.

Nightblade370 wrote:

I think it really has to do with two things: time and intent.

Revenge requires a lot of time and a desire to harm an individual/a group of people. Reacting to someone attacking to you is on-the-spot thinking, which is justified self-defense. Reacting violently to a situation not as dire immediately after it happens (like if someone's bullying you verbally) is considered malicious intent and has consequences depending on the severity, but that isn't revenge either (it's not self-defense as well).

Revenge would be like a wife killing the woman her husband is having an affair with after several days of planning or a man trying to severely maim another man for bulling him in high-school. These plans require more time and more harmful intent than a mere reaction.

Hence, self-defense and revenge have a large difference in both time and in harmful intent.





The problem is that you can't just redefine a term, especially if you want an argument to hold up (ie from a legal perspective). If you're going to make a topic trying to challenge what self defense is considered by society and qualify what should be considered self defense, then calling it revenge and furthermore using a personal definition of revenge would not only be confusing, but would also deliver an unwanted connotation of malevolence to how you are defining it. In this case, the topic really should be "what should be considered self-defense"; the word "vengeance" or "revenge" shouldn't have any place in this discussion or topic, really, unless you intend to use the actual definition of revenge.
I just copied what I heard in my lecture...



If you are hit by someone, your immediate reaction is to hit them back. This is not self defense, it is revenge. You are hitting them back out of revenge for getting a hit in on you. Regardless of the impact of the action (murder, or a small punch) it will always end up as being revenge.


what if hitting them back is a reaction you don't control (i have those if someone pokes me on the back i would turn around and whack them. ...not on purpose but thats how i react

If someone hits you , you hit them back and that's fine i see that as self defense if there going to hit you once there likely to hit you twice you have a better chance of surviving if you respond with hitting them in which i did at my school and ran whilst they were shocked by the hit.


I'm only trying to understand the professor's point of view here so hear me out. Regardless of the amount of times you are hit, regardless of the extent of the injury, it's always revenge. I believe that Nightblade370 is confusing "self-defense" with an act of aggression/attack/retaliation. As defined by dictionary.com - the act of defending one's person when physically attacked, as by countering blows or overcoming an assailant. No where in there does it say that this involves retaliating (revenge) against your foe. Self defense is defined differently in court of law. But the professor is trying to explain that any type of reaction back against an attacker is revenge at it's core.


that makes more sense but i will have to disagree with him whole heartedly :P


Yeah... I think it's really quite a conundrum because there's quite a large grey area between "defense" and "revenge" when you think of all the different situations.
81324 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
38 / M
Offline
Posted 9/10/15

spensaur wrote:


I'm only trying to understand the professor's point of view here so hear me out. Regardless of the amount of times you are hit, regardless of the extent of the injury, it's always revenge. I believe that Nightblade370 is confusing "self-defense" with an act of aggression/attack/retaliation. As defined by dictionary.com - the act of defending one's person when physically attacked, as by countering blows or overcoming an assailant. No where in there does it say that this involves retaliating (revenge) against your foe. Self defense is defined differently in court of law. But the professor is trying to explain that any type of reaction back against an attacker is revenge at it's core.


You seem to have missed part of the definition you quoted, "or overcoming an assailant". This caries the connotation of an act of aggression to prevent further assault.
Posted 9/10/15
To give an academic response I would need to brush up on what the law says, and as I'm not about to waste time doing that when you could do that yourself, after all I don't know your area and the law might be different than here. I would defer to a resident legal expert here on the matter, whoever that is.

But, if you would like my two cents, certainly feasible to do.^_^

Vengence, as I'm familiar with's common usage most often implies a degree of premeditation well after the fact, whereas self-defense is a response towards an immediate threat of bodily/ physical harm to self or others.

But I don't know, sometimes the law doesn't make sense and is open in multiple interpretation, as often is the case in courts between opposing attorneys.
21448 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
46 / M / Between yesterday...
Offline
Posted 9/10/15

Ryulightorb wrote:


gvblackmoon wrote:


FlyinDumpling wrote:

During a lecture my business law professor said "vengeance isn't self defense". Revenge meaning a person hits someone as a response to being hit. According to law, a reasonable person would walk away and not retaliate.

Shocking? Not really, this same idea has been taught since primary school. If someone hits you, report it to a teacher, don't ever hit them back. What do you think of this? It's unfair if you came out as the only injured party. Shouldn't you be able to hit them back?

This topic strictly covers assault and/or battery***


While it may seem unfair that is how the legal system works do not at anytime take the law into your own hand you only hurt yourself in those cases. The golden rule about revenge when you start the path dig two graves one for your target and one for yourself since you will suffer as well. This is why revenge is pointless it is simple self gratification.


No reasonable person would go oh you just stabbed me or punched me in the face and walk away/ not retaliate i cannot fathom someone being able to do that.


It is simple really you just walk away knowing your revenge will be the jail time they server for the assault it is a pleasant warm feeling when the other party gets hauled off to jail and you just have to fill out a police report. No fuss no muss just justice.
Posted 9/10/15

gvblackmoon wrote:


Ryulightorb wrote:


gvblackmoon wrote:


FlyinDumpling wrote:

During a lecture my business law professor said "vengeance isn't self defense". Revenge meaning a person hits someone as a response to being hit. According to law, a reasonable person would walk away and not retaliate.

Shocking? Not really, this same idea has been taught since primary school. If someone hits you, report it to a teacher, don't ever hit them back. What do you think of this? It's unfair if you came out as the only injured party. Shouldn't you be able to hit them back?

This topic strictly covers assault and/or battery***


While it may seem unfair that is how the legal system works do not at anytime take the law into your own hand you only hurt yourself in those cases. The golden rule about revenge when you start the path dig two graves one for your target and one for yourself since you will suffer as well. This is why revenge is pointless it is simple self gratification.


No reasonable person would go oh you just stabbed me or punched me in the face and walk away/ not retaliate i cannot fathom someone being able to do that.


It is simple really you just walk away knowing your revenge will be the jail time they server for the assault it is a pleasant warm feeling when the other party gets hauled off to jail and you just have to fill out a police report. No fuss no muss just justice.


If you can be articulate and explain your side of it and/or have witnesses then self defense is preferable than letting someone have their way with you and yours, and the situation can be handled at the police level and vengence sated, invalidating the need for legal measures beyond that. However both should be done depending on what it was. If someone hits you, you are entitled to defend your person in most juristictions in a REASONABLE manner. (in accordance with the assault i.e. if a guy hits you, fight back to get away , you don't kill the guy if it can be avoided) But I agree with both of you that both options are legitimate.
8389 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
27 / M
Offline
Posted 9/10/15
Yes.
Posted 9/10/15


Depends. More like equity, vigilante stuff. If your brand of justice balanced the scales in favor of righeousness in reality, maybe it is?
8389 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
27 / M
Offline
Posted 9/10/15

Mercana wrote:



Depends. More like equity, vigilante stuff. If your brand of justice balanced the scales in favor of righeousness in reality, maybe it is?


That's true. If you remove my leg I'll remove yours, move painfully.
4733 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
21 / M / Chicago, Illinois
Offline
Posted 9/10/15 , edited 9/10/15
If you mean vengeance as in you keep getting mugged, or your house keeps getting broken into, so you track the person down and kill them, that's absolutely wrong. In my opinion, the best way to counter someone bullying you, harassing you, getting mugged, or broken into, is to be prepared for it. If you don't feel safe where you live, if you have a creepy ex who stalks you and might harm you, (first a restraining order helps) consider learning a martial art, consider carrying mace or a taser, or buying a gun, or wearing body armor. Whatever you gotta do, just don't break the law doing it, no Babylonian eye-for-an-eye philosophy, and don't feel self-righteous. Batman can get away with the whole vengeance thing because he doesn't kill people, and he's a professional,. (Using batman as an example is kinda going too far though since he doesn't exist... Yet)



Now for some laughable memes
20731 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
20 / M / Bundaberg, Queens...
Online
Posted 9/10/15

gvblackmoon wrote:


Ryulightorb wrote:


gvblackmoon wrote:


FlyinDumpling wrote:

During a lecture my business law professor said "vengeance isn't self defense". Revenge meaning a person hits someone as a response to being hit. According to law, a reasonable person would walk away and not retaliate.

Shocking? Not really, this same idea has been taught since primary school. If someone hits you, report it to a teacher, don't ever hit them back. What do you think of this? It's unfair if you came out as the only injured party. Shouldn't you be able to hit them back?

This topic strictly covers assault and/or battery***


While it may seem unfair that is how the legal system works do not at anytime take the law into your own hand you only hurt yourself in those cases. The golden rule about revenge when you start the path dig two graves one for your target and one for yourself since you will suffer as well. This is why revenge is pointless it is simple self gratification.


No reasonable person would go oh you just stabbed me or punched me in the face and walk away/ not retaliate i cannot fathom someone being able to do that.


It is simple really you just walk away knowing your revenge will be the jail time they server for the assault it is a pleasant warm feeling when the other party gets hauled off to jail and you just have to fill out a police report. No fuss no muss just justice.


So you let them beat you down to a pulp by not reacting and walk away IF you survive.

Ill take my chances defending myself if they hit me once there going to do it again if i run or walk away.
21448 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
46 / M / Between yesterday...
Offline
Posted 9/11/15

Ryulightorb wrote:


gvblackmoon wrote:


Ryulightorb wrote:


gvblackmoon wrote:


FlyinDumpling wrote:

During a lecture my business law professor said "vengeance isn't self defense". Revenge meaning a person hits someone as a response to being hit. According to law, a reasonable person would walk away and not retaliate.

Shocking? Not really, this same idea has been taught since primary school. If someone hits you, report it to a teacher, don't ever hit them back. What do you think of this? It's unfair if you came out as the only injured party. Shouldn't you be able to hit them back?

This topic strictly covers assault and/or battery***


While it may seem unfair that is how the legal system works do not at anytime take the law into your own hand you only hurt yourself in those cases. The golden rule about revenge when you start the path dig two graves one for your target and one for yourself since you will suffer as well. This is why revenge is pointless it is simple self gratification.


No reasonable person would go oh you just stabbed me or punched me in the face and walk away/ not retaliate i cannot fathom someone being able to do that.


It is simple really you just walk away knowing your revenge will be the jail time they server for the assault it is a pleasant warm feeling when the other party gets hauled off to jail and you just have to fill out a police report. No fuss no muss just justice.


So you let them beat you down to a pulp by not reacting and walk away IF you survive.

Ill take my chances defending myself if they hit me once there going to do it again if i run or walk away.


If they keep it up and you attempt to walk away you have the right then to self defense this is how use of force works but if they hit you and you walk away and nothing more happens other then you reporting it they have no case against you.
20731 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
20 / M / Bundaberg, Queens...
Online
Posted 9/11/15

gvblackmoon wrote:


Ryulightorb wrote:


gvblackmoon wrote:


Ryulightorb wrote:


gvblackmoon wrote:


FlyinDumpling wrote:

During a lecture my business law professor said "vengeance isn't self defense". Revenge meaning a person hits someone as a response to being hit. According to law, a reasonable person would walk away and not retaliate.

Shocking? Not really, this same idea has been taught since primary school. If someone hits you, report it to a teacher, don't ever hit them back. What do you think of this? It's unfair if you came out as the only injured party. Shouldn't you be able to hit them back?

This topic strictly covers assault and/or battery***


While it may seem unfair that is how the legal system works do not at anytime take the law into your own hand you only hurt yourself in those cases. The golden rule about revenge when you start the path dig two graves one for your target and one for yourself since you will suffer as well. This is why revenge is pointless it is simple self gratification.


No reasonable person would go oh you just stabbed me or punched me in the face and walk away/ not retaliate i cannot fathom someone being able to do that.


It is simple really you just walk away knowing your revenge will be the jail time they server for the assault it is a pleasant warm feeling when the other party gets hauled off to jail and you just have to fill out a police report. No fuss no muss just justice.


So you let them beat you down to a pulp by not reacting and walk away IF you survive.

Ill take my chances defending myself if they hit me once there going to do it again if i run or walk away.


If they keep it up and you attempt to walk away you have the right then to self defense this is how use of force works but if they hit you and you walk away and nothing more happens other then you reporting it they have no case against you.


Fair enough but if someone punches me im going to kick then without thinking as it's a reflex on mine that i have no control over (thanks years of being bullied).

So either way there in for a surprise if they attack me
21448 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
46 / M / Between yesterday...
Offline
Posted 9/11/15 , edited 9/11/15

Mercana wrote:


gvblackmoon wrote:


Ryulightorb wrote:


gvblackmoon wrote:


FlyinDumpling wrote:

During a lecture my business law professor said "vengeance isn't self defense". Revenge meaning a person hits someone as a response to being hit. According to law, a reasonable person would walk away and not retaliate.

Shocking? Not really, this same idea has been taught since primary school. If someone hits you, report it to a teacher, don't ever hit them back. What do you think of this? It's unfair if you came out as the only injured party. Shouldn't you be able to hit them back?

This topic strictly covers assault and/or battery***


While it may seem unfair that is how the legal system works do not at anytime take the law into your own hand you only hurt yourself in those cases. The golden rule about revenge when you start the path dig two graves one for your target and one for yourself since you will suffer as well. This is why revenge is pointless it is simple self gratification.


No reasonable person would go oh you just stabbed me or punched me in the face and walk away/ not retaliate i cannot fathom someone being able to do that.


It is simple really you just walk away knowing your revenge will be the jail time they server for the assault it is a pleasant warm feeling when the other party gets hauled off to jail and you just have to fill out a police report. No fuss no muss just justice.


If you can be articulate and explain your side of it and/or have witnesses then self defense is preferable than letting someone have their way with you and yours, and the situation can be handled at the police level and vengence sated, invalidating the need for legal measures beyond that. However both should be done depending on what it was. If someone hits you, you are entitled to defend your person in most juristictions in a REASONABLE manner. (in accordance with the assault i.e. if a guy hits you, fight back to get away , you don't kill the guy if it can be avoided) But I agree with both of you that both options are legitimate.


Let me give you the real life example my brother was drinking in the bar with friends his ex comes in and after a few drinks hauls off and hits him. He went to jail for the night didn't lay a finger on her she was the one that got fined and had to explain to the judge why she lied in the first place. Better example is the bastard that abused me for three years when I was a kid I couldn't defend myself best feeling in the world was watching the buy get sentences to twenty years for what he did.

I'm not saying there aren't times for self defense but in the majority of cases if you can walk away do so. But if you need to defend yourself do so.
19572 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
23 / M / missouri
Offline
Posted 9/11/15
No vengeance is not self defense. Self defense is using force to stop an attack not reverse an assault.
Revolver Dogelot
72988 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
36 / M / somewhere that is...
Offline
Posted 9/11/15
Guys lay off the quote pyramids. That really mess up the forums, look terrible, and just take up too much space. Just quote the most recent comment from the post you are responding to and delete the rest of it.
First  Prev  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  Next  Last
You must be logged in to post.